https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64382
--- Comment #7 from Adam Butcher ---
Author: abutcher
Date: Fri Jan 27 07:59:06 2017
New Revision: 244962
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244962&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/64382
PR c++/64382
* cp/parser.c (parsing_de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64382
Adam Butcher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79165
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
Target Milestone|7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71433
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, same reason but my "simple" two-predecessor "hack" doesn't get it because
we now have three...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Daryl Haresign from comment #6)
> I guess you don't want _M_copy_assign to be public, either.
Nor inline :-)
Avoiding the try-catch like that is an improvement, I'll do that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79244
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79211
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
My cross compiler for x86_64 is configured:
../configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --prefix=/home/marxin/bin/gcc2
--disable-multilib --disable-bootstrap --target=powerpc64-suse-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79244
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
On branches this is latent wrong-code as we simply do
/* Propagate the RHS into every use of the LHS. */
FOR_EACH_IMM_USE_STMT (use_stmt, iter, lhs)
FOR_EACH_IMM_USE_O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Note the trivial fix will FAIL gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ldist-23.c which looks like
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 128; ++i)
{
a[i] = a[i] + 1;
b[i] = d[i];
c[i] = a[i] / d[i];
}
where the tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79255
Bug ID: 79255
Summary: [7 Regression] PGO bootstrap fails on x86_64/ppc64le
building Ada
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79255
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79255
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Configured with
[ 55s] + ../configure --prefix=/usr --infodir=/usr/share/info
--mandir=/usr/share/man --libdir=/usr/lib64 --libexecdir=/usr/lib64
--enable-languages=c,c++,objc,fortran,obj-c++,ada,go
--ena
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79232
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
--- Comment #4 from James Greenhalgh ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Note the trivial fix will FAIL gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ldist-23.c which looks like
>
> int i;
> for (i = 0; i < 128; ++i)
> {
> a[i] = a[i] + 1;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79211
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79219
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to H. Peter Anvin from comment #8)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > So you mean DW/W -> W, but that can result in the result being not
> > representable?
> > What's the desired behav
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78142
tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 27 Jan 2017, jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
>
> --- Comment #4 from James Greenhalgh ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64089
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-apple-darwin14 |x86_64-apple-darwin16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79211
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Ah. That reg:SF 3 is not an fpr_reg_operand (3 is GPR 3).
Now how did that happen...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5)
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2017, jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from James Green
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79211
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79239
--- Comment #9 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Author: ramana
Date: Fri Jan 27 11:22:30 2017
New Revision: 244965
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244965&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix PR target/79239 - unrecognized insn after pragma gcc pop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79239
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79253
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67951
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79244
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79244
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 27 12:24:54 2017
New Revision: 244973
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244973&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-27 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/79244
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79256
Bug ID: 79256
Summary: [7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr25413a.c execution
test
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79256
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71433
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 27 12:30:43 2017
New Revision: 244974
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244974&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-27 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/71433
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71433
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72828
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79199
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 27 13:25:28 2017
New Revision: 244975
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244975&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/79199
* c-c++-common/Wduplicated-branches-13.c: Requi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79210
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79236
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79256
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 27 13:56:59 2017
New Revision: 244976
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244976&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-27 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/79245
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79255
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79256
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
valgrind tells:
==2361== Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
==2361== General Protection Fault
==2361==at 0x8048668: octfapg_universe (pr25413a.c:111)
==2361==by 0x804839F:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79256
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79256
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79256
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(gdb) p debug_tree (exp)
unit size
align 64 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x768c2540 precision
64 context
pointer_to_this >
so the MEM is marked aligned but somehow it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71433
--- Comment #16 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
Thanks, I confirm that for r244974, there is no longer any issue on the MPFR
code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78559
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Jan 27 14:42:23 2017
New Revision: 244979
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244979&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/78559
* combine.c (try_comb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79256
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
So there's ADJUST_FIELD_ALIGN (x86_field_alignment) but the interface is not
usable from within get_object_alignment_2 at
/* When EXP is an actual memory reference then we can use
TYPE_ALIGN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79250
Pekka Jääskeläinen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pekka.jaaskelainen@parmance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79257
Bug ID: 79257
Summary: spurious -Wformat-overflow=1 warning with -O2 and
sanitizer
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79258
Bug ID: 79258
Summary: -Wduplicated-branches false positive?
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65484
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Jan 27 15:59:02 2017
New Revision: 244985
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244985&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-27 Bill Schmidt
PR target/65484
* g++.dg/vec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65484
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Jan 27 16:17:04 2017
New Revision: 244986
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244986&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79254 fix exception-safety in std::string::operator=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed on trunk so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79258
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78559
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78771
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jan 27 16:48:34 2017
New Revision: 244988
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244988&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/78771 - ICE with inherited constructor.
* call.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79131
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Jan 27 16:50:11 2017
New Revision: 244989
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244989&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-27 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/79131
* lr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71290
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Jan 27 16:51:54 2017
New Revision: 244990
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244990&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71290
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* obj-c++.dg/property/at-pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79131
--- Comment #8 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I provided the final patch solving all the test cases for the PR. We should
wait for an ACK from Arnd or Dominik to close it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70530
Askar Safin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79245
--- Comment #9 from James Greenhalgh ---
> I'm curious how that benchmarks for you (with -ftree-loop-distribution vs.
> without).
Taking trunk as 100%, I see a 2% gain on trunk with
-fno-tree-loop-distribution-patterns , and 1% gain with your pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79259
Bug ID: 79259
Summary: [7 Regression] Corrupted profile when one uses -O1
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79259
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2017-1-27
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70530
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Askar Safin from comment #5)
> 4. But (as it seems for me) the standard nowhere says that std::swap (a, a)
> is unspecified. So, it should be specified
It's specified to do:
T tmp = std::mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70530
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
If you think there's still a problem please show a concrete example where our
current implementation of std::swap causes a problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71374
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Jan 27 18:08:14 2017
New Revision: 244991
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244991&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-27 Vladimir Makarov
PR tree-optimization/71374
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i686-w64-mingw32
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79258
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79131
--- Comment #9 from Arnd Bergmann ---
I successfully rebuilt all the (now seven) previously failing kernel
configurations, no more ICE.
Thanks a lot!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79131
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79257
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70530
Askar Safin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67496
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69281
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72744
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71014
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79194
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Fri Jan 27 19:40:44 2017
New Revision: 244993
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244993&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-27 Bernd Schmidt
PR rtl-optimization/79194
* cp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79194
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71910
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71374
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78516
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79232
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
On the C++, the question really is what C++17 wants with comma expression on
the lhs used as lvalue and what should be done for C++14 and earlier.
Shouldn't COMPOUND_EXPR be handled like before for
-fstrong-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78516
--- Comment #28 from Peter Bergner ---
I totally agree, especially since the work in progress patch we did have to fix
the glibc build had so much fallout.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79260
Bug ID: 79260
Summary: missing header files for plugins: arm-isa.h,
arm-flags.h
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79229
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79232
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Though the #c1 testcase actually tests something even different (the #c5
questions apply otherwise), because there is the [d], therefore it really
should be evaluated in the order: side-effects in e, side-eff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79230
--- Comment #5 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Here is the promised reduced test case, 80 lines, and I do believe that this is
most likely causing the issues of all our 250 failing tests (hopefully).
Attached and plain:
module module1
implicit none
p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79230
--- Comment #6 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Created attachment 40606
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40606&action=edit
Reduced test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79232
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 40607
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40607&action=edit
gcc7-pr79232.patch
This patch (totally untested) implements it and fixes the ICE with both the
original reduced
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79261
Bug ID: 79261
Summary: vec_xxpermdi appears to have endian issues
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #14 from Tony Kelman ---
I'll look into whether the same flag changes the behavior in the same way on
gcc 5.
Using the opensuse repo's current cross compiler version, I reduced
SLPVectorizer.cpp down to the attached version. It's may
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #15 from Tony Kelman ---
Created attachment 40608
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40608&action=edit
smaller copy of SLPVectorizer.cpp that reproduces issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63256
--- Comment #11 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Here is my patch to clean this one up:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-01/msg01524.html
Basically this reverses the patches to sms-8 that were posted for 47013 here:
https://gcc.gnu.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79202
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 40609
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40609&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem.
This patch is believed to fix the following PRs
* target/79038 (__float
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79203
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 40610
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40610&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem.
This patch is believed to fix the following PRs
* target/79038 (__float
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79038
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 40611
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40611&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem.
This patch is believed to fix the following PRs
* target/79038 (__float
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25844
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simon at pushface dot org
---
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
